Regional studies and language skill
.jpg?w=728)
By Kim Ji-myung
How much language capacity is required for country-specific study? Or to be more concrete, is it possible for a Korean studies scholar to work without the linguistic competence to read the source materials?
It is hardly imaginable that a Chinese studies scholar doesn’t speak or understand written in Chinese or that a Japanese studies expert cannot read documents written in Japanese. Classics and old books of all three countries are in Chinese characters. But this classic literacy issue is one of the major issues facing Korean studies academia, according to a survey conducted by the Korea Heritage Education Institute (KHEI).
In 2011, at the first Korean Studies Conference co-hosted by Yonsei University and Yeongwol County, the KHEI asked the 138 participating scholars some simple and fundamental questions. The survey was aimed at collecting opinions and suggestions for feasible policy options, needed for the next phase of development in Korean studies abroad. Then again this year, to find out if there were any changes regarding these topics, we conducted the same survey on the same target group.
The result of the first survey was presented orally to a group of opinion leaders, but the outcome of the two surveys has not been published. As a designer of these two surveys, I planned to first introduce the points of the survey as part of my presentation at the upcoming KSAA (Korean Studies Association of Australia) 2015 Conference, scheduled for Nov. 25 to 27 in Adelaide. But I changed my plan.
There is the joke that “Academic monographs or dissertations are read by two people alone — the author and the advising professor.” Yet, practical issues directly related to real policies should not end up as just printed material for academia only. Therefore, I felt the need to share this information to the broader public, including the many Korean policymakers and the like more quickly.
So here are the key facts about the surveys.
The respondents submitted answers in person in 2011 at the conference. In 2015, they received the questionnaire and responded via email.
Responses represented all major quarters of the world in a well-balanced proportion. Countries represented by the participating scholars include: the Americas (the United States, Canada), Europe (U.K., France, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Poland), Asia (China, Japan, Vietnam, Mongolia), Oceania (Australia, New Zealand) and Korea.
The opinions and suggestions presented have special weight as the respondents are leading Korean studies researchers and professors working in the field. About half of the respondents took the time to make elaborate comments and suggestions.
Regarding the questions on Korean language ability in particular, there were two extremely different comments: one is if you are a serious scholar, you cannot do real research without reading the original documents most of which are written in Hanja, the Korean-Chinese characters. And that is why the area of research in the Korean studies is seriously limited to the modern and contemporary period to deal with materials in Hangeul only.
The other opinion is that demanding that hopeful Korean studies scholars must equip themselves with the proper level of Hanja literacy is unrealistic and extreme. They point out that not all Korean studies majors can read, write and speak freely in Korean, let alone in Chinese characters.
Respondents who felt that language learning should be a priority recommended turning to supporting organizations, such as the Academy of Korean Studies and the Korea Foundation, to encourage Korean studies scholars from an early stage to focus on language learning, both Korean and Hanja, and to conduct special intensive courses to master reading skills of Hanja.
The problem also lies in that the ability to read some Hanja does not mean that one can understand the classics and literary works, which also require an understanding of the grammar and a wide range of background knowledge in Hanmun (Chinese sentences). But, as we know, language skill needed for academic level does not improve overnight. As the survey results show, the problem remains, and little difference can be made in just a few years.
There are many Korean studies conferences held in English, much to the disappointment of some advanced scholars in the field who have been hoping for more advancement in the Korean language within Korean studies academia. Dr. Lee Bae-yong, president of the Academy of Korean Studies, is one such scholar who seemed to have been struck by this lack of Korean language ability after attending a Korean studies conference held recently in Europe, which proceeded entirely in English.
Having many youngsters in many corners of the world, from South America to Southeast Asia, trying to learn the Korean language in order to sing their favorite Korean idols’ songs or get jobs at Korea-related firms is something different. For lay students of Korean culture, including language, the Korean government has been expanding teaching outlets like the King Sejong Institute in many countries. There are now separate Korean language learning support programs abroad for academics and lay persons.
But the level of mastery required for serious academics still seems unfulfilled. What will motivate young scholar candidates to try to master the Korean language, including literacy in classics written in Chinese? And would short-term intensive language workshops be helpful?
These questions and more are waiting serious review by the decision-makers in charge.
The writer is the chairwoman of the Korea Heritage Education Institute (K*Heritage). Her email address is Heritagekorea21@gmail.com.